For the record

We're not ignoring the current talk of the litblogosphere, it's just that there's not a hell of a lot to add after reading the reactions from Terry, OGIC, and Jenny D.

Having said that, I think the two things that are paramount are a) realistic expectations and b) professionalism, neither of which Stacey Sullivan demonstrated particularly well, and both of which are qualities I prize incredibly highly, whether in publishing or in any other field worth pursuing.

Comments

[John Rickards]

Maybe I'm being wildly unfair to the woman, but she seems like an idiot. Two years later than planned, something she knew was twice as long as it should be, and with what I have to say is a *dire* title, and all of that pretty much her fault.

I'm doubly amazed at all those problems because she was a journalist, a job in which you *have* to meet your deadlines, you have to write to the article's target length because you know the amount of space allocated to you is only likely to go down from that original estimate, not up, and where a punchy title is worth a thousand words.

Suddenly she starts writing a book and forgets all that. And then complains about the whole thing. I'm baffled.

Little aside from TT's comments: Penguin no longer have copy-editors. They stopped using them in between my #1 and #2, and the nitty-gritty of grammar and spelling is all expected to be done by the author first and the editor second. Strange but true...

[Jim Winter]

Dear Stacey,

Um... This business is HARD! You have to work HARD! Go out! Shake hands! Promote! What? You thought this was the lottery? It's only the lottery for guys like Stephen King!

[m.j. rose]

I agree with both of you. In fact I took it a bit further in that I know more Stacy's than not --- here: http://mjroseblog.typepad.com/buzz_balls_hype/

[Jim Winter]

Success: I can get onto Borders shelves w/o the usual hoop jumping at other chains. A reader, at no cost to me, is talking my book up at LA bookstores simply because he liked the book. (Thanks, Aldo!) My mother-in-law is impressed. I'll be getting a check in June. Most writers will listen to me whine as long as I return the favor. (That reminds me. I owe Maviano a beer. And Laura, too.) I earned $42.50 for short stories this year, thus doubling my income. (Three figures can't be far now, baby!!!) And with no advance, I will have a massive tax write-off for the year. Which translates into a nice vacation next summer.

NYT Bestseller List? For a first book? It's not better to burn out because while rust never sleeps, it gets a lot more done. (Your Neil Young moment for the day, and from Ohio no less.)

[Laura]

Here's the thing that galls me -- this is a JOURNALIST, who took on a difficult and arcane world, but didn't have the intellectual curiosity to do a little cursory research about the industry on which she had pinned all her hopes.

As it happens, it was Terry Teachout -- who became a friend subsequent to writing a lovely one-paragraph review of my first book -- who warned me that all writers secretly dream of the bestseller list, but didn't understand how books got there. I educated myself -- and learned to shoot for different benchmarks. When I won an Edgar, I made a study of the careers of everyone who had won the same award in the past decade (best pbo) and realized it meant NOTHING in terms of longevity and success.

Sometimes, as a writer, I do stick my head in the sand, but only temporarily. I don't seek out bad news; I know it will find me. I don't angst over certain decisions that are better left to my publisher. But I have no sympathy for such whining and I am flabbergasted (again) that a serious magazine would be so breathlessly idiotic about the publishing industry.

[dan bloom]

excuse me, everyone, my caps are not working tonight and here is my background my latest book in taiwan at http://ccca.nctu.edu.tw/~hlb/poem/EyesOfAChild/

but excuse me, stacy sullivan was not whining, she was not the one whining. i feel she is getting the short end of the stick in the blogosphere.... it was the reporter gal backerman at cjr who did the reporting, who made it sound like sullivan was whining, but i don't think she herself was whining. she is smart, she knows the game. the reporter is to blame, not her.

shoot the messenger, not the subject.

that said, the real important thing is the amazon sales stats issue. it is a total hype lie. as the sullivan story reports, it is just a number that measures how a particular book is selling in relationship to how other books are selling on a particular day....it is not repeat not a measure of actual book sales......as such, it is total shite.

stop looking at those amazon.com stats. they are one of the worst thing to have ever happened to the book business..... pure hype

why is everyone here attacking ms sullivan. repeat, she was not the one whining. the reporter did a hatchet job, let's hear from her first. i am sure she was mis, not misquoted, but miss understood. beckerman owes us all an explanation. that said, i loved the piece and thought terry teachout's note the best; don't quit your day job

smile

[Contrary Mary]

Hmm. I guess the course I took on Editing at Harvard Summer School when I worked there was worth the time & effort, if only because I did learn that if you pull your book back after marketing, design, etc. have done work on it, they are highly unlikely to expend any effort on your behalf the second time around.

What is tough about this story is that none of the things she did was individually so bad, but they snowballed in a way that hurt the book.

But again, she is a journalist, and had to know that part of the value of the work was its timeliness. But, I can see working in the journalism world with an idea of how it was going to be when you wrote your book...

[Jeanne Ketterer]

Anyone actually read the book? I've had it on my to buy list bec I'm interested in the subject. IIRC, the Wash Post gave it a decent review.

The business side of writing can be really depressing. Sucks the energy out of you. You've got to understand how it works.

Jeanne

[Laura]

I re-read the article and it's true, it's hard to describe Sullivan as whining as there are almost no direct quotes from her in the article. However, I have to assume that Sullivan was the source for the details of her tracking her Amazon number, her inability to meet deadline, her lack of face time with her editor.

[Sandra]

Caro Idiosincrasico, è da tanto che li leggo e non capisco quasi niente di quello che scrivi. Ma non importa, immagino tu scriva cose profonde e meravigliose. Adesso sarai tu che probabilmente non capirai niente. Non ricordo più come sei capitato fra i miei preferiti ma lì ti custodisco. Ciao

[Terrill Lee Lankford]

While Sullivan does appear to have been naive, many first time writers assume there will be constant communication during the process. In this case there seems to have been a monumental LACK of communication from the publishing house. Considering the house involved, I am not surprised.

[Jeanne Ketterer]

Welcome Sandra. We'll need a translation, though. Anyone?

Jeanne

[Ray]

"Dear Idiosyncratic... Bye."

Sorry, that's about the extent of my Italian. Something to do with profundity and being great, I think.

Hey, if it was French or German, I'd be a real help. If I had a dictionary.

[Jeanne Ketterer]

If Sandra'll come back ...
Seems to me a general comment - I apologize for clumsy effort effort and hope I'm not doing anything wrong and putting totally way off words in her mouth:
'... understand both sides ... most important the ability/imagination to write about an important (subject?) ... problem both sides ... no work - something - is owned/responsibility ...'
Well, I'm sure I mangled completely and totally am off, but I was curious about Sandra's response and wanted to give it a try. And I'm interested in the subject of Sullivan's book.
I went to her website, but unfortunately no translation for English.

Jeanne

[John Rickards]

Courtesy of Babelfish (and a surprisingly readable response):

"Idiosyncratic beloved, is from whom I read them and I do not understand nearly nothing of what you write. But it does not import, I imagine you you write deep and wonderful things. Now you will be that probably you will not understand nothing. Not memory more as six capitato between my preferred ones but lì I guard to you. Hello"

Or (I think, again, apologies for mistakes here): I read your site even though I don't understand much of what you write. But it doesn't matter, I imagine that you write deep and important things. Now it's probably you who can't understand me! *something about, at a guess, not having time for more and the equivalent of "keep up the good work"* Bye!

Peculiar...

[Jeanne Ketterer]

Whoa was I was off, John! I was trying to pick out words/equivalents. Huh. I'll stick to German/Russian.
I went to her website, googled a translation, but I still had difficulty understanding what she'd posted.

Jeanne

[Kevin Wignall]

Ciao, Sandra!

[Jeanne Ketterer]

Whoa was I was off, John! I was trying to pick out words/equivalents. Huh. I'll stick to German/Russian.
I went to her website, googled a translation, but I still had difficulty understanding what she'd posted.

Jeanne

[Sandra]

Dear Jeanne, thank you for your welcome. John's translation is very good. Sorry for my english taht is shameful for my age and my work. But however so it is.
In conclusion I wrote that you are in my preferred blogs but I dont remember how it happened. I'll try to improve my english for reading your blog but, at this moment, I like too understand only half. Ciao Sandra

[Jeanne Ketterer]

No problem, Sandra. Stick around --- I'm sorry for the pitiful translation - John got me on it.

I'm sure Sarah will be happy to learn she's one of your preferred blogs (as do many others) -- she's doing a great job.

Who are some of your favorite crime fiction writers?

Jeanne